LPA Profile
What we hold on a single planning authority: appeal behaviour, what they refuse on, which policies they cite, and how current their local plan is. For the national league table and 47-year statistical history, see Council Performance. New: which refusal reasons survive appeal here — measured from real Inspectorate decision letters.
Buckinghamshire Council
GSS E06000060 · Portal: idox (ok) · council register
What this authority refuses on
Classified from the reasons in decision notices we hold for this council. Categories can overlap — one reason often engages more than one issue.
| Objection type | Reasons |
|---|---|
| Design, scale or layout | 3 |
| Neighbour amenity | 1 |
| Principle of development | 1 |
| Missing information or evidence | 1 |
How this council decides
Measured against the published determination target on 1,446 decisions. Average window from valid date to target: 50 days (the statutory period is 56 days for most applications, 91 for majors).
(4+ days before target)
(final 3 days)
from valid to decision
This authority is mixed: a substantial share of decisions land after the statutory target, so treat the target as indicative.
Which day decisions land
| Mon | 16.5% | |
| Tue | 25% | |
| Wed | 16.7% | |
| Thu | 22.1% | |
| Fri | 19.4% |
An even working week is 20% a day. Amber marks a day carrying 26% or more.
By application type
| Type | Decisions | After target | On deadline |
|---|---|---|---|
| Full | 433 | 60% | 31% |
| Trees | 357 | 27% | 25% |
| Outline | 198 | 30% | 44% |
| Telecoms | 117 | 19% | 16% |
| Conditions | 86 | 35% | 34% |
| Amendment | 55 | 49% | 36% |
| Other | 34 | 9% | 62% |
| Telecoms Notification | 24 | 0% | 17% |
By case officer
| Officer | Decisions | After target | On deadline | Avg days |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jonathan Richardson | 17 | 0% | 18% | 7 |
Officers are not allocated cases at random — a caseload weighted towards majors or contentious sites will run longer than one of householder applications, and that is the case mix rather than the officer. Read this as context for your own case, not as a ranking of individuals.
What "after the target" means. Published data cannot distinguish an agreed extension of time from a target that was simply missed — both appear the same way. This measures when the decision was issued relative to the statutory target, and nothing more. Deadline data is currently available for London authorities only.
Policies most often cited in refusals
Case officers in our data
| Officer | Applications | Refused |
|---|---|---|
| Jonathan Richardson | 17 | 0 |
| Kim Brown | 7 | 0 |
| Samantha Walker | 5 | 0 |
| Bibi Motuel | 5 | 0 |
| Ellen Coles | 3 | 3 |
| Ana Patriarca | 2 | 0 |
| Anna Shah | 2 | 0 |
| Emma Showan | 2 | 0 |
Counts come from the applications we have scraped, which is a fraction of each officer's caseload. Treat as a sample of who is active, not as a performance measure of an individual.
Agents most active here
| Agent / firm | Applications |
|---|---|
| Openreach | 90 |
| South Bucks Tree Surgeons Limited | 51 |
| Authorised Designs Ltd | 23 |
| Home Counties Architectural Services | 19 |
| dr design | 16 |
| Brocklehurst Architects Ltd | 15 |
| Fineland Forestry Limited | 15 |
| A Ellis Tree Surgery Ltd | 14 |
Development plan
Local Plan for Buckinghamshire
Adoption date not published in the national register · plan period 2045-01-01
Plan documents
National statistics for this authority →
Councils with data on file
On the numbers. The refusal rate, officers and agents here are computed from the applications PlanningCore has collected for this authority — for most councils that is a recent sample rather than the full register, and the date range above tells you which. The appeal overturn rate comes from Planning Inspectorate decisions and covers a much longer period. Use the national statistics page for complete, official volumes.